eQSL.cc isn't as verifiable as LoTW.
sco at sco-inc.com wrote:
> There is an excellent substitute for LOTW. It is called "eQSL.cc".
> It even will print and mail you a real card plus you can download or
> upload the image of the real card.
> It is very easy to use and i prefer it over LOTW.
>> Les W4SCO
> www.logwindow.com
> www.myweblinks.cc
>>> At 12:25 AM 1/25/2007, you wrote:
>> One of the other nuisances of LoTW is that is definitely NOT rover-friendly.
>> For example, each location i operate from has to be submitted as a separate
>> file. As a rover, until recently, i had more locations that i have operated
>>from than confirmed grid squares! Yet it's the rovers who provide the rare
>> grid squares and make life more interesting for the rest of us. Roving can
>> be alot of work, and contact made as rovers don't even count towards most
>> awards.
>>>> I'm not sure LoTW handles grid square boundaries properly and it seems even
>> less likely it handles grid square corners at all... I ended up writing my
>> own software for preparing QSL cards and LoTW is one of my biggest headaches.
>>>> On the other hand, if God[dess] Forbid, i drop dead tomorrow [and have not
>> designated a QSL manager in my will], people will still have a way of their
>> confirming QSOs with me.. And perhaps someday all of this won't have to be
>> done by mail. But alas, at this point, my confirmation rate via LoTW is
>> about 1.5% (and that is quite an improvement over a year ago). It's a step
>> in the right direction, but it's got a long ways to go.
>>>> So it would be nice if LoTW became more friendly to VHF-and-above operators
>> (as i don't think satellite operators are the only ones suffering) and they
>> come up with an automated way of designating satellites (such as utilizing
>> the current KEPS [plus an 'alias' file so they can match commonly used names
>> which differ from the NORAD names]). A lot have gone up recently, albeit so
>> far, most are telemetry-only birds.
>>>> Finally, one of the nice things about the paper cards that is lacking on
>> LoTW is the personal touch in the comments on a card. This is included in
>> LoTW submissions as the 'QSLMSG' field, but one does not get that field
>> back in the "ARRL Logbook of the World Status Report" which one has a
>> matching contact, alas. So i'll keep sending out the paper ones in the
>> foreseeable future, there does not seem to be an adequate substitute...
>>>> -- KD6PAG (Networking Old-Timer, Satellite QRPer)
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb>>>> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb